Language desk
< November 27	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 29 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 28

How do you call this kind of seat in English?

How do you call this kind of seat in English? Pictures: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

In Thai, it is called แท่น, ตั่ง, เตียง or อาสน์. All English-Thai dictionaries say these words translate as bed, stool, table, or simply seat, but I don't think they are fitting terms.

Is there any better term in English? Thank you so much.

--iyouwetheyhesheit (talk) 14:08, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bench? --Onorem (talk) 14:12, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would also call them a bench if someone was sitting on it. Especially the first. Though the rest seem deep enough to be tables. Bed and stool are definitely not right though. Dismas|^(talk) 14:37, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call them seats at all, I'd call them platforms, as in "... seated on a gilt platform" for instance. Eric Corbett 15:14, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps daybed. It's not a bed for sleeping on, but is a low, wide bench for reclining on during the daytime. — SMUconlaw (talk) 15:16, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If padded, this would be called an ottoman. It could also be referred to as a bench or, contrary to Dismas, a stool. In the United States, this design would be more likely to be used as a coffee table. John M Baker (talk) 15:18, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested "platform" because my assumption was that they would be used to display seated Buddhas, as the one in the first image is. But if they're just general items of furniture ... Eric Corbett 15:27, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's too close to the ground to be a proper seat or bench. More like a coffee table. Except that what Buddha himself is on actually looks like a bench. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:58, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

coffee table —Nelson Ricardo (talk) 21:53, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Raqib and Atid or Raqeebun Ateed

Kiraman Katibin, What are they called? Two articles mention two things. -- (Russell.mo (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2014 (UTC))[reply]

They are Raqib (رقیب) and Atid (عتید). "Raqeebun Ateedun" is a part of the Quranic verse supposed to be the names of these two angles. see 50:18. Omidinist (talk) 19:35, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The other (2nd) article stated what you stated but with 'Raqeebun Ateed'... Thank you. -- (Russell.mo (talk) 05:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Russell.mo -- If you want to delve down deeply, then you'll have to learn a little about the Arabic language. To start with, because Omidinist is a Persian or Farsi speaker, he uses the Persian form of the letter ya (ی), while in discussing the details of Qur'anic Arabic, the Arabic form of the letter (ي) should be used. The long vowels could be transcribed into the Latin alphabet as ee, ii, ī etc. according to the transcription conventions used. In this case, the final -un is an i'rab vowel (when to omit or include such inflections is a very complicated subject)... AnonMoos (talk) 06:37, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well that wasn't much of a help... It just clarifies what Basemetal tried to mention indifferently earlier i.e., not to use any language and to just pronounce it in English... What do you suggest, would be the universal understanding AnonMoos? -- (Russell.mo (talk) 09:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC))[reply]

It's not much of a help because you're eager to ferret out what seem to you to be discrepancies between different transcriptions of the Arabic, yet you seem to have no interest in learning anything about the factors which can result in such multiple transcriptions. Suffice it to say that all the forms mentioned so far in this section are valid given some choice of transcription conventions and choice of treatment of i'rab inflections, so you needn't bother yourself about such apparent "discrepancies"... AnonMoos (talk) 12:46, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Its not for me AnonMoos, it for the universal readers. who'll read my work... -- (Russell.mo (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Resolved

Rephrasing

Does this sentence make sense? “Whatever individuals do consciously in a conscious/unconscious manner will be recorded and will be justified on Judgement Day regardless of their consciousness” -- (Russell.mo (talk) 18:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC))[reply]

A statement like that sounds like it comes from the fictitious organization called the Redundancy Society of Redundancy. Even forgetting that, I don't quite understand the point of the statement. Are you trying to say "willfully"? That is, something done of one's own free will? (As opposed to coercion or insanity or whatever.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:56, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lmao.

I don't know, this is the best I could come up with after reading the article on the above post. I'm trying to sound profound...

I kind of, mean to say, 'whatever you do knowingly, unknowingly, intentionally, unintentionally, with/without full knowledge...' -- (Russell.mo (talk) 19:12, 28 November 2014 (UTC))[reply]

That conveys the meaning and pretty much avoids redundancy of word usage. Given all that, you could shorten it to something like, "Whatever you do on earth, intentionally or not..." Presumably this covers non-action as well. Like if you ignored that guy the cops were beating up (or the cop those guys were beating up), that's still something you did. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:39, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll use what you stated i.e. "Whatever you do on earth, intentionally or not, will be recorded and will be justified on Judgement Day." Thank you -- (Russell.mo (talk) 05:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Resolved

father

Hello, I would like to know that [ˈfɑdɚ] is a wrong pronunciation or not. 162.247.122.228 (talk) 19:06, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a "hard" "th" sound, as in bother, farther, further, gather, hither, lather, neither, rather, tether, weather, whether, etc. There's no "D" sound in it, unless you're from Brooklyn, or if you're singing "Hello Muddah, Hello Fadduh". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:33, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And by "hard" th, I'm distinguishing from "soft" th which often appears at the ends of words, such as bath, hath, math, path, wrath, etc. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:42, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Standard linguistic terminology is voiced for [ð] and voiceless for [θ]. The transcription of the word according to Wikipedia "IPA for English" conventions is [fɑːðər]... AnonMoos (talk) 22:44, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the OP got those symbols mixed up with a letter "d". If he still has questions, he can ask away. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:21, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[ˈfɑːd̪ɚ] is correct ? 162.247.122.228 (talk) 01:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, according to AnonMoos it would be [fɑːðər]. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In some dialects, ɚ may be correct instead of ər, but the difference is subtle, and you'll likely find a continuum of English speakers who would say ə -- ɚ -- ər depending on exactly who was saying it. But the middle consonant is definitely ð,. or a "voiced th", in nearly every standard dialect I can think of. There may be a few dialects that undergo a universal ð --> d substitution, but if someone wanted to speak what was recognizable as a standard form of English, they'd use ð. -Jayron32 03:00, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

♪♫"Hello Muddah, Hello Fadduh"♪♫♪And lets not forget this this father with a /d/. (It's a lovely day outside... I should be on my bicycle, not tying this silly stuff...) --Shirt58 (talk) 03:28, 29 November 2014 (UTC) [reply]

In Liverpool, UK, we pronounce it as a 'd'. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 08:08, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So does this mean a native speaker of Scouse would pronounce ðə ˈbiːtlz as /də ˈbiːtlz/ ? Gear! Apologies for not closing the "small" HTML tag pair in my previous posts. --Shirt58 (talk) 09:32, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Close, but we would replace the 't' with a glottal stop. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 07:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quite normal in Ireland, I'd say. In the Caribbean they say something like /fɑːdɐ/ (with no /ɚ/).--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 00:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]